Facing the Brexit facts
Theresa May spelled out some of what she called the “hard facts” of Brexit last week, conceding for the first time that the price of Britain regaining more sovereignty was that the UK and the EU would enjoy less access to each others’ markets. In her third major speech on Brexit, the PM played down the prospect of regulatory divergence and accepted that Britain had a responsibility to help find a solution to the Irish border issue. But she made it clear that the UK wouldn’t budge on ending free movement and being able to strike trade deals with other countries. The PM also denied that Britain’s desire for a deep and “ambitious” partnership with the bloc amounted to “cherry-picking”, pointing out that all free trade deals involve bespoke arrangements ( see page 13).
Days before May’s speech, two former PMS, Tony Blair and John Major, sought to shift the terms of the Brexit debate. Blair called on EU leaders to try to avert Britain’s departure by offering concessions on immigration. Major demanded that MPS be given a free vote on the final deal, and raised the possibility of a second referendum.
What the editorials said
“At last, May has injected a dose of realism into the Government’s position on Brexit,” said the FT. She has accepted that leaving the EU will have a price; pledged to match EU rules on goods, trade, competition and state aid; and proposed that the UK remains part of EU agencies covering chemicals, medicine and aviation. “Vagueness” persists in some areas, but the speech was a step forward. Much of it sounded like “a paean to European integration”, said The Guardian. May talked of a partnership “covering more sectors and cooperating more fully than any free-trade agreement anywhere in the world today” – which could almost be a description of the single market. It raised the question of why we’re bothering to leave the EU at all.
Certainly, no one could accuse May of setting out a radical Brexit plan, said The Daily Telegraph. But her blueprint would still give the UK the freedom to deregulate its economy and control its borders. It would also, “crucially”, give it “the right to secure new trade deals with dynamic emerging economies”. It was a “solid, sensible, upbeat speech”, said The Times – albeit one that should have been made long ago. It’s now up to the EU to “reciprocate”.
What the commentators said
It’s becoming “clearer by the day”, said Rachel Sylvester in The Times, that May is leading us towards Brexit against her better judgement, knowing it will damage our national interests. Asked by a German reporter last week whether she thought leaving the EU would be worth it in the end, she replied simply that Britain’s politicians had a duty to deliver what the people had voted for. “No wonder Mrs May seems so tortured by her role in No. 10.”
The PM’S speech hasn’t moved the UK and EU any closer to a deal, said Wolfgang Münchau in the FT, because May is calling for a trading relationship that Brussels has already rejected. The EU is adamant that there are only two courses available to the UK: it can remain bound by single market rules, with no voting rights – the Norway option; or it can have a basic, Canadastyle deal that would impose severe restrictions on trade. The EU chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, and the European Commission are giving no quarter, said Dominic Lawson in the Daily Mail. They’ve even proposed that, in the absence of any other solutions to avoid a hard border in Ireland (plenty of which exist), a new border should be drawn across the Irish Sea, “with Northern Ireland becoming a detached subordinate province of the EU”. It’s an outrageous attempt to strong-arm the UK, by “weaponising the Good Friday Agreement”.
EU leaders argue that their restrictive position on Brexit is essential to protect the integrity of the single market, said Gideon Rachman in the FT. Yet the EU is capable of being flexible when it wants to. Greece was bailed out despite the EU’S “no bailout” clause; France and Germany have flouted budget rules. The EU has more room for manoeuvre than it claims. What you have to remember, said Tom Kibasi in The Guardian, is that the EU is genuinely afraid that the UK might “get the better” of it. “In Brussels, the British are viewed with suspicion – seen as hiding cunning behind charm.” EU leaders saw how the UK successfully secured its interests as a member of the bloc, shaping its evolution and winning key opt-outs. “One of the great ironies of the current impasse is that Britain’s success in the EU stokes fears of its conduct outside it.”
What next?
The EU does not want to “build a wall” with Britain, EU President Donald Tusk said on Wednesday, as he unveiled the EU’S draft guidelines for negotiations on post-brexit relations. Tusk said the EU wanted a free-trade deal with zero tariffs on goods, but warned it would not be “frictionless” and must allow EU fishing boats access to UK waters.
The guidelines, which outline a much more limited cooperation than May’s speech envisioned last week, rule out the UK remaining an associate member of any EU agencies, and say the UK will be treated as a third country in respect of financial services, a sector London wants to be included in a free-trade deal.